Ferguson: "The Champions League is a bigger tournament than The World Cup"

Neil3030

"The Champions League is the best competition in the world right now, better than the World Cup, better than the European Championships, it is a fantastic tournament," he said.

[Edit] Sorry the title should read "better", rather than "bigger" [/edit]

This debate will undoubtedly descend into a squabble between those who still support international football and those who only care about club football, but in every objective respect I can think of, this statement is nonsense.

The World Cup only happens once every 4 years, qualification takes 2 years, which means the opportunity to win it is much less than the annually occurring Champions' League.

Global interest in the World Cup is massively higher than the Champions' League, as measured by sponsorship revenue and TV ratings.

Hosting the World Cup is a huge honour and an enormous economic boost to the region in question. While this isn't a directly analogous to the multinational Champions League hosting format, the sum of tournament-contingent regional economic activity across all host cities, including the final, would come nowhere near that of the World Cup.

So in my opinion, Fergie's point can be translated as (a) "it's the highest revenue generating tournament for participating teams" and (b) "it's the most important tournament to me, a club manager."

But to suggest the Champion's League is "better than the World Cup" is a statement so blinkered it borders on delusion.

Eathrin

There's no way that the champions league is nearly as good as the world cup, yes it generates less revenue, yes it is a smaller event. However the quality of teams in the champions league probably surpasses that of the world cup and that's probably the only way that statement is justifiable.

TangyZizzle

What a delusional old bastard.

eagle eye

The World Cup is the biggest and best tournament in soccer imo. Champion's league is a great tournament in its own right but so is the Copa Libertadores which I also love.

Ebbs

Quality wise it probably is a "better" tournament in terms of technical abilities. Players are training week in week out with eachother and have strong team ethics.

The world cup is the biggest and most entertaining tournament simply for the aura that surrounds it, the little obscure nations causing upsets and the fact it simply lifts a countries spirits.

jesus_thats_gre

Super, another pointless debate...

Who gives a ****?

flahavaj

Both competitions are pretty crap till they get to the knockout stages tbh. The CL is probably slightly better as you can say for sure the best players in the game wil be playing in it, whereas the World Cup is more limited by geographic boundaries and some great players have never played in it.

The World Cup also probably is looked upon a little more fondly and nostalgically because of its lack of frequency - If the World Cup was every year like the CL I think people would get sick of it pretty fast, whereas there usually a pretty good appetite for the CL year in year out.

mike65

Euro championships when 16 teams were in it - pure.

flahavaj

mike65 wrote: »

Euro championships when 16 teams were in it - pure.

Euro championships when 8 teams were in it!

Theresalwaysone

I'd say if the Champions League was only on every four years peoples views would be somewhat different. Personally I think in terms of quality, entertainment and watchability the Champions League is better.

If it was on during the summer every four years I think it would take on a whole new level of prestige.

Seaneh

I neither agree nor disagree.

The standard of play/player in the Cl is miles ahead of the world cup, however, the world cup is still far more important to 99% of people in the world.

Crazy Horse 6

Christ on a bike

Yakult

Can't say I agree, but he's entitled to he's own opinion. Nothing wrong with that.

Paparazzo

For fans, it has to be the world cup. If you're country qualifies, it's a party atmosphere in the entire country.

curry-muff

Standard wise, the Champions League is miles ahead.

Global Interest wise, World Cup wins.

I much rather watching the champions league, and if the World Cup happened every year most people would get sick of it.

Paparazzo

Paparazzo wrote: »

For fans, it has to be the world cup. If you're country qualifies, it's a party atmosphere in the entire country.

I can't remember what that feels like

Blatter

I think another contributing factor as to why many prefer the World cup is the fact it's on during the Summer and it's accossiated with drinking and just great craic in general. The weather is much better and alot of people are on holidays.

Obviously the fact it's once every four years is the other big factor already mentioned.

onemorechance

Crazy Horse 6 wrote: »

Christ on a bike

Kidchameleon

Do you think there will ever be a club World Cup every 4 years? I have often though it would be great. I know there is a club word cup already but its a complete Mickey Mouse job.

onemorechance

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Do you think there will ever be a club World Cup every 4 years? I have often though it would be great. I know there is a club word cup already but its a complete Mickey Mouse job.

I'm not so sure that would make it any less "Mickey Mouse". A world cup of club leagues might be an interesting idea. I think for fairness and to make it more interesting it should be like the Fantasy Premier League game! Only 3 players max from each team can represent each league! :pac:

murpho999

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Do you think there will ever be a club World Cup every 4 years? I have often though it would be great. I know there is a club word cup already but its a complete Mickey Mouse job.

Haven't you answered your own question there?

dan1895

At least the name "world cup" isn't misleading unlike the uefa run money fest that is the "champions" league. Bring back the european cup. Ya f**k up and your out! No second chances and no fourth place teams either.

flahavaj

dan1895 wrote: »

At least the name "world cup" isn't misleading unlike the uefa run money fest that is the "champions" league. Bring back the european cup. Ya f**k up and your out! No second chances and no fourth place teams either.

But not the best teams in the world either.

OPENROAD

Give me a preseason friendly at Barnet over the World cup any day of the week.

dan1895

flahavaj wrote: »

dan1895 wrote: »

At least the name "world cup" isn't misleading unlike the uefa run money fest that is the "champions" league. Bring back the european cup. Ya f**k up and your out! No second chances and no fourth place teams either.

But not the best teams in the world either.

No but they have the chance to qualify.

Cill Dara Abu

Crazy Horse 6 wrote: »

Christ on a bike

With Mary on the handle bars

flahavaj

dan1895 wrote: »

No but they have the chance to qualify.

Not necessarily. If Europe only have say 18 spots but 25 of the best 32 teams are European then they can't all qualify can they?

Nalz

jesus_thats_gre wrote: »

Super, another pointless debate...

Who gives a ****?

A few people by the looks of things.

LuckyLloyd

Ferguson says dumb things shocker. Nothing to see here.

Nalz

Is it bigger? I don't think so

Is it better quality? Probably yes

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Ferguson says dumb things shocker. Nothing to see here.

wahey! I know ye such a dumb thing to say I know, I know ye........ I know

murpho999

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Ferguson says dumb things shocker. Nothing to see here.

Indeed,what's wrong with Fergie today?

Also, complaining about doing deals with the devil. Just made up with the BBC after years and now Sky (which is who he meant) are the devil.

Really felt sorry for him saying because of TV they often had to work on a Wednesday night and then a Saturday morning!

thebman

I personally prefer the world cup because I like the strategic challenges of dealing with the players available to you that it brings.

This happens a little less when it is club level as big teams have lots of money.

I think national competitions in sports usually surpass club level sports though. It is also easier for people to get behind their team and more universal or in other words less barrier to entry for those with lesser interest in the sport who can still get behind their country.

dan1895

flahavaj wrote: »

dan1895 wrote: »

No but they have the chance to qualify.

Not necessarily. If Europe only have say 18 spots but 25 of the best 32 teams are European then they can't all qualify can they?

No of coarse they cant all qualify. But they all have the opportunity to do so at the start of the qualifying campaign.

scudzilla

mike65 wrote: »

Euro championships when 16 teams were in it - pure.

flahavaj wrote: »

Euro championships when 8 teams were in it!

Euro Championships when we (Wales) were in it.









DOH

shamrock55

if slur alex said it it must be true:rolleyes:

flahavaj

dan1895 wrote: »

No of coarse they cant all qualify. But they all have the opportunity to do so at the start of the qualifying campaign.

So you agree that its not necessarily the best teams in the world?

Nalz

:cool:

shamrock55 wrote: »

if slur alex said it it must be true:rolleyes:

:cool::cool::cool::cool::cool::cool::cool::cool::cool::cool:

dan1895

flahavaj wrote: »

dan1895 wrote: »

No of coarse they cant all qualify. But they all have the opportunity to do so at the start of the qualifying campaign.

So you agree that its not necessarily the best teams in the world?

Yes, I never said otherwise. My point was that every team in the world (in fifa) is involved. Whereas a lot of teams in the "champions" league are champions of nothing.

Boskowski

Champions League is only watchable from the playoff stages onwards. Before that there's only the odd good game in it.

It went sh1t when they started taking in 3rd and 4th places from the bigger leagues and the seeded teams began to feature their reserve teams.

Who wants to see United reserves playing Kaibal Baku? I know I don't.

After that then its mostly about money though isn't it? Only to a certain extent the top clubs are still distinguishable by nationalities or playing styles or regional character. Mostly its interchangeable, highly paid modern gladiators who could play anywhere. Here today there tomorrow.

The World Cup is different. The whole world comes to a standstill for four weeks. There isn't the possibility of buying x number of star players, you gotta make do with what you have. You see all the different playing mentalities. The fact its only on every four years.
Well and of course my homecountry is rather good at it, that helps.

ArmaniJeanss

Theres so many ways that the Champions League is better.

But only the World Cup can stop a country.
And long after you can't quite remember who scored that winning goal for you in the 2012 Champions League quarter final, you'll remember where you were, who you were with, the surge of emotion you felt when some hitherto journeyman from ballygobackwards stuck the ball in the net for a scrappy equaliser versus a superior Ghana in a World Cup group game in Rio.

flahavaj

dan1895 wrote: »

Yes, I never said otherwise. My point was that every team in the world (in fifa) is involved. Whereas a lot of teams in the "champions" league are champions of nothing.

Every top-flight club in UEFA could qualify for the CL too.

rossie1977

Trilla wrote: »

Is it bigger? I don't think so

not even in the same ballpark http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aOYdMOmxoV4c&refer=intsports

smokedeels

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Ferguson says dumb things shocker. Nothing to see here.

Nothing dumb about it, it's something he said around the time of the last World Cup when a microphone was shoved into his face.

Any Global competition will earn more money and therefore be "bigger" financially but It's clear he was speaking about the standard of football and it's better in the Champions League than the WC, certainly in the past decade, it's not even debatable.

Le King

The world cup is obviously more prestigious as you are playing for your country and its once every four years. But to compare their revenues based on one year of world cup and one year of champions league is silly. Over four years the CL is a bigger money maker. As that's the only effective way to measure revenue. But the wc is miles bigger than the CL in terms of prestige.

smokedeels

shamrock55 wrote: »

if slur alex said it it must be true

Not exactly, he's actually only correct about 99% of the time.

He's still human, or in human form anyway.

Hank Scorpio

I doubt he`ll be saying that when united are beaten well by Barcelona like the last couple of finals. All you needed was a good midfielder Fergie, and you blew it.

Blatter

nuxxx wrote: »

I doubt he`ll be saying that when united are beaten well by Barcelona like the last couple of finals. All you needed was a good midfielder Fergie, and you blew it.

Don't talk such nonsense. He could have had his choice of any midfield in the world bar the Barca lads and still get hockyed by them.

Yes, he may have stood a better chance but the you make it sound like winning would gave been almost a sure thing with a better midfield. Absolute boll*cks.

dfx-

Nothing beats the World Cup group stages with Ireland, T&T, Ghana, Ivory Coast, New Zealand, Cameroon in 1990, Bulgaria in 1994, Northern Ireland, North Korea in 1966 and 2010, South Korea, even Zaire in 1974 (:D)...and then the finals. France v West Germany 1982, Croatia in 1998, England Argentina 1986. Always more memorable than most Champions League winners, nevermind other games.

I'd be fairly sure no matter what Suarez does, he'll be remembered for the handball against Ghana across the world. Not a goal against Besiktas or HJK Helsinki.

jaykay74

fergie, fergie, fergie. bash, bash, bash....

MaceFace

Everything that Fergie says (like many other managers) has an agenda to it.
He has been rambling on about how clubs deserve more TV revenue than they currently get, particularly from foreign markets. This is just another point in his plan to break Utd away from the rest and forge their own deals.
If Fergie was boss of a World Cup team, no doubt that would be bigger and better than the CL.

Saying that, imho the World Cup is much better than the CL in many ways. Look at Giggsy - one of the best players in the last 20 years and no chance of winning the CL. Same goes for 100s of other players. The list of players who won World Cups are very small and are generally very very good players (compared to some of the terrible players who have CL winners medals)

I have stopped watching many of the CL group games as they are both predictable and meaningless. Utd will put out a weaker team tonight than they would like or would for a PL game and probably still win. Even if they don't, big deal, they will still qualify. Almost every World Cup finals game means something and one loss immediately puts the pressure on.

Finally, many people choose to support Utd or Barca or Chelsea just because they are successful. You can't choose who you support in the World Cup - you only support the team of where you were born.

dan1895

flahavaj wrote: »

dan1895 wrote: »

Yes, I never said otherwise. My point was that every team in the world (in fifa) is involved. Whereas a lot of teams in the "champions" league are champions of nothing.

Every top-flight club in UEFA could qualify for the CL too.

Thats my problem with that competition, it should just be for champions. I think it has become a bit of a farce with teams like man city in it who havent won the league in what? 30 odd years?